[Project:Primes of the top 10 ever] List the top 12 seasons between Tim Duncan vs. Magic Johnson

[Odinn21]

Good post. I just listed some performances off of the top of my head. Generally though, Duncan was a lot more prolific on offense in 2002 and 2003. In those years he played like a legitimate scoring alpha on top of all the other work he did. In other years for whatever reason, his offensive numbers were more subdued. Some of it was age and some was also his role on the team perhaps with Manu and Tony improving. How much of each... it's hard to say but I still think there is a major drop off from 2002/2003 to any other version of Duncan and it's primarily the offense.

I might be off on my defense comment. Those numbers do look pretty great. I was just basing it off of the eye test. He began saving energy after 2006 that I think he lost just a little bit of effort.

I've seen people saying Duncan didn't have such a stand-out peak because he was so consistent throughout his prime but I think I've never seen a stance like yours. The reality was in between. Duncan definitely had a peaky peak. But otoh, his prime was still pretty consistent in terms of quality and potential wise. The issue for him was his durability.

Duncan's per game numbers got lower after his peak seasons because the Spurs could afford to play him less. Duncan from 2001 to 2004 was a one-man army as much as a low post oriented player can get. Your argument in here is kind of like blaming LeBron James for not putting up his 2009 numbers in Miami. They reached huge output when needed but the frequency of such need changed under different circumstances. Further numbers like per poss numbers and +/- footprints, all of them hold up until 2007 as prime Duncan.

This is Duncan's per poss numbers from 2001 to 2007, and also rs+ps PI-RAPM* ranks;

*: Btw, RAPM needs to be evaluated as role-specific, nbashotcharts and bball-index do so too. Duncan was still #2 among centrepieces in 2006 and 2007 when roles are involved.
**: Edit, forgot to mention that 2005 per poss numbers are up until his injury. I took the screenshot from a specific spreadsheet about his 2005 season.

I should also mention this;
2001 Spurs were +8.3 NRtg team (1st in the league, +2.6 gap over the 2nd)
2002 Spurs were +6.9 NRtg team (3rd in the league)
2003 Spurs were +5.8 NRtg team (3rd in the league)
2004 Spurs were +7.9 NRtg team (1st in the league, +1.4 gap over the 2nd)
2005 Spurs were +11.0 NRtg team (1st in the league, +3.6 gap over the 2nd) until Duncan's injury
2006 Spurs were +7.5 NRtg team (2nd in the league)
2007 Spurs were +9.2 NRtg team (1st in the league, +1.6 gap over the 2nd)

Duncan was already a historically good player. He made the Spurs overachieve in the regular seasons from 2001 to 2004. Then the team got better. It should be obvious from that +7.5 NRtg mark in 2006 when Duncan didn't have his 100% mobility (jogger's heel) even though he was still serviceable and the team still had a better result than Duncan's MVP seasons.

Moving onto another topic, if Duncan's 2002 and 2003 seasons were standing alone to the extent you're taking, he wouldn't have that many strong playoff series performances outside of his peak seasons.
His performance against the Mavs in 2006 was arguably the best he ever had (at least according to himself, I'd reckon it was top 3 at worst for him).
His performance against the Suns in 2007 was arguably a top 5 series for him.
I have Duncan's playoff series ranked and rated, didn't want to get into it deep to keep short. If he had a peak the way you mentioned in your 1st post in the thread, he wouldn't have just as good or pretty close performances outside of those 2 seasons.

[70sFan]

I just think Duncan's offense took a hit. He struggled mightily to keep a decent level of scoring volume and effciency against strong defenders outside of his peak... off the top of my head Garnett in 1999, Garnett in 2001, Rasheed in 1999, Wallaces in 2005, Camby in 2007, Varejao in 2007... all held Duncan down to pretty pedestrian numbers.

Odinn did a great job of responding to the majority of points you mentioned in this thread (and he did it better than I would), so I mention only one point - why are you so low on 2001 Duncan then?

If you value high offensive usage and strong postseason performances, then this should be one of the highest seasons on this list. The only reason why Duncan's scoring numbers are slightly lower than in 2003 is because he shot FTs unusually bad in this season. He shot only 61% from FT line compared to 71% in 2003. With his 2003 efficiency, Duncan would average 23 ppg on 55.5 TS% which is basically identical to his 2003 averages. The same thing applies to the playoffs - Duncan shot a lot of FTs in the playoffs on unusually weak efficiency.

If you tried to say that Duncan wasn't good enough passer or his defense wasn't elite, then it's another debate but in terms of scoring 2001 Duncan was basically the same player he was in 2003. He also had worse perimeter players around him and had to share post up touches with better version of Robinson. I don't know, but I don't understand why you think that 2003 Duncan is better than all versions of Magic, but 2001 is worse than 1985 Magic because of scoring. His scoring repertoire was already developed by this point.

[LA Bird]

Very low turnout in this round... maybe everyone is waiting for the Russell vs Wilt showdown next.

1. 2003 Duncan
2. 2002 Duncan
3. 1987 Magic
4. 1990 Magic
5. 2007 Duncan
6. 1989 Magic
7. 2005 Duncan
8. 2001 Duncan
9. 1986 Magic
10. 2004 Duncan
11. 1991 Magic
12. 2006 Duncan

02/03 Duncan is one of the best 2 year peaks and comfortably above peak Magic. I don't feel that strongly about any of the seasons after the top 5 so the rest could go either way. I think prime Duncan generally had higher two way impact but he had some issues with missed games (04, 05). He had a subpar regular season in 06 but followed it up with a better playoffs than 88 Magic.

Why do you feel so low on 1988 Magic? I'm specially interested in the criticism of his postseason run, because I find it quite impressive if anything. I know that the Lakers struggled throughout the playoffs, but at no point Magic really underperformed. In fact, he was by far the best player in the finals and he faced extremely good team that was well equipped to deal with old Showtime Lakers.

I didn't say 88 Magic's playoff run wasn't impressive - it's just not better than 06 Duncan's or his own other playoff runs during 87-91 by a large enough margin to make up for the weaker regular season (see Owly's post #8). Magic had a great Finals series which should have won him the FMVP but overall, I don't think it was a cut above his other playoff performances.

[sansterre]

1. 2003 Tim Duncan
2. 2002 Tim Duncan

These are pretty clearly the two top seasons. I'm not saying that '03 Duncan is comparable to '91 Jordan or '09 LeBron, but those are two epic seasons where Duncan was often the best offense and defensive player on the court. I love Magic, but I don't see him stacking up.

3. 1990 Magic Johnson
4. 1991 Magic Johnson
5. 1987 Magic Johnson

It's hard to properly evaluate Magic; his offensive contributions were unquestionably greater than the sum of his parts (not unlike Duncan on defense). But these seasons were some of Magic's best and I don't know that Duncan's defense is enough to make up the difference.

6. 2001 Tim Duncan
7. 1999 Tim Duncan
8. 2007 Tim Duncan
9. 2006 Tim Duncan
10. 2004 Tim Duncan
11. 2005 Tim Duncan
12. 1989 Magic Johnson

Basically, I think that when Magic is at his offensive best (and not injured) he can hold his own against non super-peak Duncan. But once you take out those seasons . . . it's hard to top a player as all-around strong as Duncan who had so many excellent seasons.

[70sFan]

1. 2003 Tim Duncan
2. 2002 Tim Duncan

These are pretty clearly the two top seasons. I'm not saying that '03 Duncan is comparable to '91 Jordan or '09 LeBron, but those are two epic seasons where Duncan was often the best offense and defensive player on the court. I love Magic, but I don't see him stacking up.

3. 1990 Magic Johnson
4. 1991 Magic Johnson
5. 1987 Magic Johnson

It's hard to properly evaluate Magic; his offensive contributions were unquestionably greater than the sum of his parts (not unlike Duncan on defense). But these seasons were some of Magic's best and I don't know that Duncan's defense is enough to make up the difference.

6. 2001 Tim Duncan
7. 1999 Tim Duncan
8. 2007 Tim Duncan
9. 2006 Tim Duncan
10. 2004 Tim Duncan
11. 2005 Tim Duncan
12. 1989 Magic Johnson

Basically, I think that when Magic is at his offensive best (and not injured) he can hold his own against non super-peak Duncan. But once you take out those seasons . . . it's hard to top a player as all-around strong as Duncan who had so many excellent seasons.

A couple of questions:

1. Why do you have 1991 Magic ahead of 1987-89? Is it because of three point shot? Do you account for significant downgrade in his defensive ability?

2. Why 1999 Duncan so high? I understand that he had really nice postseason run but he was clearly less developed player by then and he didn't reach his defensive potential either. On top of that, he wasn't a good passer yet - he simply faced less defensive pressure.

[Odinn21]

Tim Duncan vs. Magic Johnson results;

Code: Select all

1.   60 points / 1.000 share / '03 Tim Duncan
2.   55 points / 0.917 share / '02 Tim Duncan
3.   48 points / 0.800 share / '87 Magic Johnson
4.   41 points / 0.683 share / '90 Magic Johnson
5.   40 points / 0.667 share / '07 Tim Duncan
6.   31 points / 0.517 share / '01 Tim Duncan
7.   25 points / 0.417 share / '05 Tim Duncan
8.   20 points / 0.333 share / '88 Magic Johnson
9.   19 points / 0.317 share / '89 Magic Johnson
10.  17 points / 0.283 share / '91 Magic Johnson
11.  14 points / 0.233 share / '04 Tim Duncan
12.   7 points / 0.117 share / '86 Magic Johnson
12.   7 points / 0.117 share / '06 Tim Duncan
                               
14.   6 points / 0.100 share / '99 Tim Duncan

Points within top 12 seasons voted;
Tim Duncan 47 - 32 Magic Johnson

Points totals in top 12 seasons voted;
Tim Duncan 232 - 152 Magic Johnson

Winner: Tim Duncan

Results on Google Sheets

[Djoker]

Good post. I just listed some performances off of the top of my head. Generally though, Duncan was a lot more prolific on offense in 2002 and 2003. In those years he played like a legitimate scoring alpha on top of all the other work he did. In other years for whatever reason, his offensive numbers were more subdued. Some of it was age and some was also his role on the team perhaps with Manu and Tony improving. How much of each... it's hard to say but I still think there is a major drop off from 2002/2003 to any other version of Duncan and it's primarily the offense.

I might be off on my defense comment. Those numbers do look pretty great. I was just basing it off of the eye test. He began saving energy after 2006 that I think he lost just a little bit of effort.

I've seen people saying Duncan didn't have such a stand-out peak because he was so consistent throughout his prime but I think I've never seen a stance like yours. The reality was in between. Duncan definitely had a peaky peak. But otoh, his prime was still pretty consistent in terms of quality and potential wise. The issue for him was his durability.

Duncan's per game numbers got lower after his peak seasons because the Spurs could afford to play him less. Duncan from 2001 to 2004 was a one-man army as much as a low post oriented player can get. Your argument in here is kind of like blaming LeBron James for not putting up his 2009 numbers in Miami. They reached huge output when needed but the frequency of such need changed under different circumstances. Further numbers like per poss numbers and +/- footprints, all of them hold up until 2007 as prime Duncan.

This is Duncan's per poss numbers from 2001 to 2007, and also rs+ps PI-RAPM* ranks;

*: Btw, RAPM needs to be evaluated as role-specific, nbashotcharts and bball-index do so too. Duncan was still #2 among centrepieces in 2006 and 2007 when roles are involved.
**: Edit, forgot to mention that 2005 per poss numbers are up until his injury. I took the screenshot from a specific spreadsheet about his 2005 season.

I should also mention this;
2001 Spurs were +8.3 NRtg team (1st in the league, +2.6 gap over the 2nd)
2002 Spurs were +6.9 NRtg team (3rd in the league)
2003 Spurs were +5.8 NRtg team (3rd in the league)
2004 Spurs were +7.9 NRtg team (1st in the league, +1.4 gap over the 2nd)
2005 Spurs were +11.0 NRtg team (1st in the league, +3.6 gap over the 2nd) until Duncan's injury
2006 Spurs were +7.5 NRtg team (2nd in the league)
2007 Spurs were +9.2 NRtg team (1st in the league, +1.6 gap over the 2nd)

Duncan was already a historically good player. He made the Spurs overachieve in the regular seasons from 2001 to 2004. Then the team got better. It should be obvious from that +7.5 NRtg mark in 2006 when Duncan didn't have his 100% mobility (jogger's heel) even though he was still serviceable and the team still had a better result than Duncan's MVP seasons.

Moving onto another topic, if Duncan's 2002 and 2003 seasons were standing alone to the extent you're taking, he wouldn't have that many strong playoff series performances outside of his peak seasons.
His performance against the Mavs in 2006 was arguably the best he ever had (at least according to himself, I'd reckon it was top 3 at worst for him).
His performance against the Suns in 2007 was arguably a top 5 series for him.
I have Duncan's playoff series ranked and rated, didn't want to get into it deep to keep short. If he had a peak the way you mentioned in your 1st post in the thread, he wouldn't have just as good or pretty close performances outside of those 2 seasons.

Of course he had strong series outside of his peak namely 2005 WCF and 2006 WCSF but in 2002 and 2003 he was doing ~27 ppg consistently. Is that chart you posted for the regular season or playoffs or both?

I'll take your word and I'm willing to temper my stance but I still feel I would take any prime season of Magic over non-peak versions of Duncan. You made me doubt myself a bit but I still think the drop off was considerable.

Odinn did a great job of responding to the majority of points you mentioned in this thread (and he did it better than I would), so I mention only one point - why are you so low on 2001 Duncan then?

If you value high offensive usage and strong postseason performances, then this should be one of the highest seasons on this list. The only reason why Duncan's scoring numbers are slightly lower than in 2003 is because he shot FTs unusually bad in this season. He shot only 61% from FT line compared to 71% in 2003. With his 2003 efficiency, Duncan would average 23 ppg on 55.5 TS% which is basically identical to his 2003 averages. The same thing applies to the playoffs - Duncan shot a lot of FTs in the playoffs on unusually weak efficiency.

If you tried to say that Duncan wasn't good enough passer or his defense wasn't elite, then it's another debate but in terms of scoring 2001 Duncan was basically the same player he was in 2003. He also had worse perimeter players around him and had to share post up touches with better version of Robinson. I don't know, but I don't understand why you think that 2003 Duncan is better than all versions of Magic, but 2001 is worse than 1985 Magic because of scoring. His scoring repertoire was already developed by this point.

To be honest you may have a point about 2001. Still his 2001 series against the Lakers was probably his worst and led to his team getting swept. He also wasn't particularly good in Round 1 against Garnett. I just didn't get that all-time level feel from 2001 Duncan and 2004 onwards that I got from 2002 and 2003 versions.

[70sFan]

Duncan was absurdly dominant in the first two games against the Lakers and Spurs still lost these two games. I mean, he scored literally half of their points in game 2, how can you expect more from a player?

Spurs were simply far worse team and they had problems with injuries. Duncan didn't play bad against Lakers, his team was simply outmatched.

I don't know, I don't see how you can have peak Duncan over any version of Magic but any other season below Magic's 7th best season. Duncan wasn't that much different player in 2003 than in 2001 or 2007. I simply struggle to understand this reasoning. It's the same problem I have with people calling 1994 Hakeem GOAT-candidate but saying that 1990 Hakeem was nothing special - except that the differences in Hakeem's case were bigger than in Duncan's. I may miss something of course, that's why I'm asking.

[Djoker]

Duncan was absurdly dominant in the first two games against the Lakers and Spurs still lost these two games. I mean, he scored literally half of their points in game 2, how can you expect more from a player?

Spurs were simply far worse team and they had problems with injuries. Duncan didn't play bad against Lakers, his team was simply outmatched.

I don't know, I don't see how you can have peak Duncan over any version of Magic but any other season below Magic's 7th best season. Duncan wasn't that much different player in 2003 than in 2001 or 2007. I simply struggle to understand this reasoning. It's the same problem I have with people calling 1994 Hakeem GOAT-candidate but saying that 1990 Hakeem was nothing special - except that the differences in Hakeem's case were bigger than in Duncan's. I may miss something of course, that's why I'm asking.

He was terrible in games 3 and 4 though. Maybe I should reconsider 2001 Duncan but 2004 and later he definitely took a step back offensively. Again, it may have been because he simply didn't have to do as much with Manu and Tony improving but players carrying bigger loads do get more credit. After all, we are comparing individual players.